VANGUARD COURT WATCH: Co-Defendants Face Gang Charges in Drug Case

by Stephanie Yang

On Friday, February 15, 2013, John Lemus and German Quezada were scheduled for a hearing for substance offense and a gang-related enhancement. They are represented by Mr. Cobb and Mrs. Sequeira.

Opening statements from DDA Robin Johnson said that there is enough qualifying evidence to stipulate that the incident that occurred on December 2012 is a gang-related offense. She called the first witness, Ramón Cuellar, to the stand.

Mr. Cuellar was in custody during the same time as Mr. Quezada and Mr. Lemus. When asked if he knew if Mr. Lemus and Mr. Quezada were gang affiliated, Cuellar said he wasn’t sure but had a feeling they were because of the colors they wore.

Before the confrontation started, Cuellar stated he was being loud because he was excited that he was going to be released. Afterwards he said Mr. Quezada probably got mad because he was sleeping and told Mr. Cuellar to “shut the f— up.”

After they exchanged a few more “f— you’s,” Mr. Cuellar went to go use the phone and saw John Mr. Lemus pass by him toward Mr. Quezada’s cell.

As Mr. Cuellar went back upstairs, he saw Mr. Lemus and Mr. Quezada together but did not hear what they were saying. As he continued toward the bathroom, he heard Mr. Quezada and Mr. Lemus saying “Come on…” but said he ignored them.

Then he turned around and saw them both in his face and starting to punch him. He fought back to defend himself but ended up on the ground. Mr. Cuellar said that it happened too fast and all he remembers is seeing stars.

A few days after incident, Mr. Lemus ended up being Mr. Mr. Cuellar’s cellmate. Mr. Cuellar was a bit nervous when he saw Mr. Lemus, but had a feeling Mr. Lemus wanted to talk because Mr. Cuellar had pressed charges.

Mr. Lemus said if Mr. Cuellar dropped the charges, then no one would mess with him afterwards. Mr. Cuellar called the guards to move his bunk since he was uncomfortable with the arrangements.

Cross-examination by Cobb and Sequeira revealed that Mr. Cuellar had wanted to drop the charges but it was already too late. Mr. Cuellar said at first he pressed charges when he was asked about it, because he was upset, but afterwards wanted to drop it because he felt the fight was childish and a misunderstanding. After he changed bunk, he hadn’t seen Mr. Lemus or Mr. Quezada anymore.

Afternoon Session – Gang Hearing Continues

By Vanguard Court Watch Intern

Ms. Sequeira questioned Cuellar about what the word “snitch” means to him. He replied that it is, “telling on another man . . . no one wants to be labeled a snitch.” He says that there is an unsaid honor code that you respect by keeping your mouth shut or staying out of trouble if possible.

Ms. Sequeira then asked if it is common for paperwork to make its way around the jail and he replied that it is. When paperwork is dispersed it is commonly a way for prisoners to stay “in check” with what is going on. It may also act as a source of social control within the prison.

Cuellar’s testimony repeatedly reminded everyone that he had wanted to drop the case and to not press charges, but the detective on the case, Bautista, kept asking him questions over and over about why either of the defendants would have anger toward him.

On re-direct, Deputy District Attorney Johnson questioned Cuellar about who “runs the jail.” He seemed a little skeptical on the stand and it was easy to tell he was not comfortable being in the courtroom. During his testimony he said that he is a little afraid of Mr. Lemus and not scared of Quezada “at all.” She looked back at an interview he had with Bautista where he mentioned that he had to be careful about whom he hangs out with outside of prison.

Juan Ceja was brought to the stand.  He works for the Yolo County [Sheriff’s] Deputy office in court services. On December 21, 2012, he was working at court holding, and came into contact with Mr. Lemus.

He claimed that Mr. Lemus’ demeanor was seemingly upset and Mr. Leemus went on to tell him how he felt harassed by Detective Bautista, mainly because of a search he had done on his vehicle and home. Ceja testified that Mr. Lemus told him Bautista “has to watch his back” and that he’s going to go after him.

Mr. Ceja made sure that Mr. Lemus wanted him to notify Bautista. Ceja says he talked to Bautista about the threats made.

Hector Bautista, the detective on the case, was brought to the witness stand and Ms. Johnson questioned him about Ceja’s contact with him. He says that Mr. Lemus’ comments and threats made him feel very uneasy. He said that he has had such comments before but that they do not usually make him so apprehensive. He went on to say that he was uneasy because of his knowledge of gangs, particularly in Yolo County. Bautista also brought up the fact that gang members in Yolo County have killed two officers.

Bautista contacted the law enforcement agency and told them about the legitimate threat. He said he had spoken with Cuellar and that he was aware the defendants were a part of the criminal street gang, the Norteños. Cuellar’s plan, after being released from prison, was to keep a low profile and avoid, to the best of his ability, being seen on the streets.

Ms. Johnson then went over all of Mr. Lemus’ prior gang fights, dating back to the early 2000’s. In order to prove that the fight between Cuellar and the defendants, Quezada and Lemus, was benefitting the Norteños street gang, she gave a hypothetical.

She said that if known, validated Norteños were arrested and involved in a fight, while yelling at a non-gang member, and then both Norteños came behind him and punched him, “would you have an opinion as to whether or not it would benefit the Norteños street gang?” Bautista responded that it definitely would.

On cross-examination, Ms. Sequeira tried to prove that there would indeed be no actions on Mr. Lemus’ threat, by asking Bautista repeatedly if any physical harm has been done to him since the threat was made through Ceja.

Bautista was excused and Judge Mock said he was prepared to rule on the sufficiency of evidence on the case. He said that count 4, based on speculation, clearly shows sufficient evidence.

Judge Mock agreed that most of the conversation between Mr. Lemus and Ceja did not amount to a threat.  However, once the defendant said “watch your back,” everything changed. Thus, there is sufficient evidence for count 4 against Mr. Lemus.

On count 1, the judge said that overt acts are preparatory to the commission of a target offense, and that there was clearly evidence that there was an agreement – but there was no preparatory behavior beyond that agreement before the assault occurred. Therefore, he did not find sufficient evidence to hold either defendants for count 1. On count 2, he said there was sufficient evidence to show group assault for the benefit of the Norteños street gang.

Once Mr. Lemus showed Cuellar the paperwork passed around the jail, Judge Mock expressed he would say that was a threat to induce Mr. Cuellar to drop the charges.

What is perhaps most interesting about this case is that one of the defendants, German Quezada, was convicted on December 19, 2012, and given 20 years in state prison as well as a term of 15 years to life for attempted murder and gang enhancements during a drive-by shooting.

Mr. Quezada was 19 years of age at the time of the attempted drive-by in 2011. Although Quezada is not being connected to any threats made in this case, he could still potentially get gang enhancements.

Another questionable item in this case is the fact that Cuellar admitted to feeling “pressured” by Bautista to speak up and allow them to press charges.

As a result, he cannot really live his life “normally,”  free, outside of prison, until the case is finished.

He said a couple times during testimony that if he had not felt compelled to press charges by the DA’s office that none of this would be happening and he could just move on with his life.

This, of course, sheds light on the problem all too often met with cases such as this, especially gang-related cases, and that is the incredible amount of weight any witnesses, especially the victims, have to carry on their shoulders when they are pushed to testify and press charges when they openly say they do not wish to.

Judge Mock set the arraignment on this case for Department 1 on Monday, March 4 at 10 a.m.

Categories: